Final Report Summary - CSPIC (The Birth of Diplomacy through Factions at Power: the Catholic-Spanish Party in the Imperial Court (1556-1659))
In our current time of political uncertainty, when the once solid building of the state-nation is cracking and the notions of allegiance and citizenship are on stake, the discussion on the hidden motivations and mechanisms of politics proves to be topical. One of the main problems of our representative systems is the rather unknown weight of lobbies and groups of interest in shaping the political line. Is there an elite pact eroding the foundations of democracy?
The present research rolls back these questions to early modern courts, which have proved to be an interesting bank proof: there were common European trends, networking was crucial, and central authority was still weak. The chosen case of study is the imperial court of Vienna/Prague between mid-16th and mid-17th century. This period let us analyse the impact of confessionalisation and the contrast between a cosmopolite and complex court and the reality of weak Emperors, who were heavily influenced by the kings of Spain, their powerful relatives, and the Popes. The question is: did it exist and how functioned an alleged Spanish-Catholic faction at the imperial court? Due to the transnational and highly topical nature of the underlying question, this research is targeted both for policy makers and general public concerned on political participation and lobby creation.
Departing from the line of the court studies, the researcher has implemented a micropolitical methodology in an actor-centred perspective enriched with a social network analysis and a careful conceptual history to develop a research which aims to open new paths in the diplomatic history. The basic material to be analysed has been obtained thanks to a crossed archival work beyond bilateral notions in several European repositories, especially the Vatican, Simancas, Vienna, London, and Florence.
Thanks to the detailed analysis developed, the variety of sources taken into account and the new methodologies applied, new conclusions have arisen from the tentative hypotheses. It has been established that in the imperial court there was not an organised Catholic-Spanish faction but two constants: the patronage of the Spanish King and the vigilance of the Pope. Instead of the simplistic vision of a radical Catholic alliance between the Pope, the Spaniards, and the Jesuits, two strategies of pressure concurred: the Spanish style of large patronage in money and honours and the discreet –and cheaper– Papal spiritual pressure. Both strategies often converged, but after the dissension of 1620s, they appeared independently.
The researcher pretended to explore a new diplomatic history moving the scope from ambassadors to their interlocutors at the host court. In the present case of study, the Spanish diplomacy proved to be more intense and detailed than the Papal one, which almost always was behind the Spaniards in terms of quality of information, direct influence, and spread of networks. The success of such diplomatic system derived from its radical dynastic nature. The researcher has checked that the relations between the courts of Madrid and Vienna/Prague were scarcely professional and institutionalised because the real core was the household of the Spanish Empresses Maria of Austria (1548–1581) and Maria Anna of Austria (1630–1646). These households were exceedingly larger and more crucial than the Spanish embassy, which proved to be an ancillary institution for the Empresses. Whenever no Spanish member of the dynasty stayed at the imperial court the embassy was a more efficient, albeit incomplete, centre of power. Furthermore, the focus in the households reintegrates the weight of the informal politics and the importance of women in them.
This courtier society of ministers, high courtiers, officials, and friars was organised according to more complex rules than taking sides pro or contra the Spanish/Catholic part. The game of allegiances was exceedingly more subtle and complex, taking into account the changeable nature of the households’ composition, the limits of communication and access set by the court ordinances and the necessity to adapt the system to every emperor’s personal style. For this reason, the researcher has followed a multilayered version of the individuals involved and uttered the limited meaning of accepting once the Spanish patronage. In order to more accurately establish their alignments, it has been carefully recorded in the project’s database the interchange of services and rewards with the Papacy and the Spanish Monarchy.
The research is not limited to the Central European court world and it aims to contribute to the current discussions on transnational models of elite circulation and cultural transfer. The researcher proposes to the general debate on the development of global politics that the court model not only fitted for the Catholic-Mediterranean area but also for the Protestant Europe and, as shown by the Ottoman example, is exportable to almost every system of personal rule. In this context, it is proposed the birth of diplomacy as an extension of factional struggles between courts. Apart from its scientific meaning, the research contributes to build a shared European identity. Regardless of their political goals, the “Spanish faction” showed that it was possible to transcend national boundaries. Those informal groups cooperated in a Europe-wide basis and shaped diplomacy more through negotiation than violent imposition.
The project’s outcomes have been presented in specialised conferences and publications, many of them available on public access. The work developed continues thanks to the formation of the network “The Spanish Faction” (http://faccion.hypotheses.org) in which 20 researchers from 10 countries are cooperating to unveil the influence of transnational informal groups in shaping a pan-European order. The individuals who took part in that Spanish faction have been recorded in a bio-bibliographical database which is also accessible through the Spanish version of Wikipedia.
The present research rolls back these questions to early modern courts, which have proved to be an interesting bank proof: there were common European trends, networking was crucial, and central authority was still weak. The chosen case of study is the imperial court of Vienna/Prague between mid-16th and mid-17th century. This period let us analyse the impact of confessionalisation and the contrast between a cosmopolite and complex court and the reality of weak Emperors, who were heavily influenced by the kings of Spain, their powerful relatives, and the Popes. The question is: did it exist and how functioned an alleged Spanish-Catholic faction at the imperial court? Due to the transnational and highly topical nature of the underlying question, this research is targeted both for policy makers and general public concerned on political participation and lobby creation.
Departing from the line of the court studies, the researcher has implemented a micropolitical methodology in an actor-centred perspective enriched with a social network analysis and a careful conceptual history to develop a research which aims to open new paths in the diplomatic history. The basic material to be analysed has been obtained thanks to a crossed archival work beyond bilateral notions in several European repositories, especially the Vatican, Simancas, Vienna, London, and Florence.
Thanks to the detailed analysis developed, the variety of sources taken into account and the new methodologies applied, new conclusions have arisen from the tentative hypotheses. It has been established that in the imperial court there was not an organised Catholic-Spanish faction but two constants: the patronage of the Spanish King and the vigilance of the Pope. Instead of the simplistic vision of a radical Catholic alliance between the Pope, the Spaniards, and the Jesuits, two strategies of pressure concurred: the Spanish style of large patronage in money and honours and the discreet –and cheaper– Papal spiritual pressure. Both strategies often converged, but after the dissension of 1620s, they appeared independently.
The researcher pretended to explore a new diplomatic history moving the scope from ambassadors to their interlocutors at the host court. In the present case of study, the Spanish diplomacy proved to be more intense and detailed than the Papal one, which almost always was behind the Spaniards in terms of quality of information, direct influence, and spread of networks. The success of such diplomatic system derived from its radical dynastic nature. The researcher has checked that the relations between the courts of Madrid and Vienna/Prague were scarcely professional and institutionalised because the real core was the household of the Spanish Empresses Maria of Austria (1548–1581) and Maria Anna of Austria (1630–1646). These households were exceedingly larger and more crucial than the Spanish embassy, which proved to be an ancillary institution for the Empresses. Whenever no Spanish member of the dynasty stayed at the imperial court the embassy was a more efficient, albeit incomplete, centre of power. Furthermore, the focus in the households reintegrates the weight of the informal politics and the importance of women in them.
This courtier society of ministers, high courtiers, officials, and friars was organised according to more complex rules than taking sides pro or contra the Spanish/Catholic part. The game of allegiances was exceedingly more subtle and complex, taking into account the changeable nature of the households’ composition, the limits of communication and access set by the court ordinances and the necessity to adapt the system to every emperor’s personal style. For this reason, the researcher has followed a multilayered version of the individuals involved and uttered the limited meaning of accepting once the Spanish patronage. In order to more accurately establish their alignments, it has been carefully recorded in the project’s database the interchange of services and rewards with the Papacy and the Spanish Monarchy.
The research is not limited to the Central European court world and it aims to contribute to the current discussions on transnational models of elite circulation and cultural transfer. The researcher proposes to the general debate on the development of global politics that the court model not only fitted for the Catholic-Mediterranean area but also for the Protestant Europe and, as shown by the Ottoman example, is exportable to almost every system of personal rule. In this context, it is proposed the birth of diplomacy as an extension of factional struggles between courts. Apart from its scientific meaning, the research contributes to build a shared European identity. Regardless of their political goals, the “Spanish faction” showed that it was possible to transcend national boundaries. Those informal groups cooperated in a Europe-wide basis and shaped diplomacy more through negotiation than violent imposition.
The project’s outcomes have been presented in specialised conferences and publications, many of them available on public access. The work developed continues thanks to the formation of the network “The Spanish Faction” (http://faccion.hypotheses.org) in which 20 researchers from 10 countries are cooperating to unveil the influence of transnational informal groups in shaping a pan-European order. The individuals who took part in that Spanish faction have been recorded in a bio-bibliographical database which is also accessible through the Spanish version of Wikipedia.
